Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Differential Effects of Self-graphing on Self-monitoring of Early Literacy Outcomes in Kindergarten Students

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Behavioral Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine how an early literacy intervention, Kindergarten Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies (K-PALS; Mathes et al. Kindergarten peer-assisted literacy strategies (K-PALS): Sopris West, 2001), can be intensified to extend the positive outcomes to students who do not initially demonstrate an adequate response to intervention. K-PALS was intensified by incorporating a self-monitoring package that included self-graphing. An alternating treatment design was used to compare the effectiveness of K-PALS with self-graphing alone and K-PALS with a self-monitoring package to baseline/K-PALS for the purpose of increasing student performance on the early literacy measure of phonemic awareness. The results of the study indicate that while the self-monitoring package was the more effective intervention for two of the three student participants, the self-graphing alone intervention also resulted in positive outcomes for both of these participants. There was no change in the phonemic awareness performance for the third participant throughout the alternating treatment phase. Implications for intensifying academic interventions within the context of a Response to Intervention framework are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albers, C. A., & Hoffman, A. (2012). Using flashcard drill methods and self-graphing procedures to improve the reading performance of English language learners. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 28, 367–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2012.731365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 300–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, D. W., Daly, E. J., III, Jones, K. M., & Lentz, F. E., Jr. (2004). Response to intervention: Empirically based special service decisions from single-case designs of increasing and decreasing intensity. Journal of Special Education, 38, 66–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, C. L. (2010). Evaluating the effectiveness of progress monitoring as a second grade mathematics intervention (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3632795).

  • Chan, P. E., Graham-Day, K. J., Ressa, V. A., Peters, M. T., & Konrad, M. (2014). Beyond involvement: Promoting student ownership of learning in classrooms. Intervention and School and Clinic, 50(2), 105–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2020). Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, E. J., III, & Martens, B. K. (1994). A comparison of three interventions for increasing oral reading performance: Application of the instructional hierarchy. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 459–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, E. J., III, & Martens, B. K. (1999). A brief experimental analysis for identifying instructional components needed to improve oral reading fluency. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 83–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, E., Martens, B. K., Dool, E., & Hintze, J. (1998). Using brief functional analysis to select interventions for oral reading. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8, 203–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, E. J., III, Witt, J. C., Martens, B. K., & Dool, E. J. (1997). A model for conducting a functional analysis of academic performance problems. School Psychology Review, 26, 554–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L., & Mirkin, P. K. (1977). Data-based program modification: A manual. Minneapolis, MN: Leadership Training Institute for Special Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiGangi, S. A., Maag, J. W., & Rutherford, R. B. (1991). Self-graphing of on-task behavior: Enhancing the reactive effects of self-monitoring on on-task behavior and academic performance. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14(3), 221–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duhon, G. J., Noell, G. H., Witt, J. C., Freeland, J. T., Dufrene, B. A., & Gilbertson, D. N. (2004). Identifying academic skill and performance deficits: The experimental analysis of brief assessments of academic skills. School Psychology Review, 33(3), 429–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C., Dreyer, L. G., Flugman, B., & Gross, A. (2007). Reading rescue: An effective tutoring intervention model for language-minority students who are struggling readers in first grade. American Educational Research Journal, 44(2), 414–448. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207302175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engelmann, S. (1975). Your child can succeed. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, D. J., Shaywitz, S. E., Stuebing, K. K., Shaywitz, B. A., & Fletcher, J. M. (1996). Developmental lag versus deficit models of reading disability: A longitudinal, individual growth curves analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.88.1.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, K. A., & Dexter-Mazza, E. (2004). Using self-monitoring with an adolescent with disruptive classroom behavior: Preliminary analysis of the role of adult feedback. Behavior Modification, 28, 402–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445503258982.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Thompson, A., Al Otaiba, S., Yen, L., Yang, N. J., et al. (2002). Exploring the importance of reading programs for kindergartners with disabilities in mainstream classrooms. Exceptional Children, 68, 295–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Good, R. H., Kaminski, R. A., Shinn, M., Bratten, J., Shinn, M., Laimon, D., Smith, S., & Flindt, N. (2004). Technical adequacy of DIBELS: Results of the Early Childhood Research Institute on measuring growth and development (Technical Report, No. 7). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.

  • Graham-Day, K., Gardner, R., III, & Hsin, Y. (2010). Increasing on-task behaviors of high school students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Is it enough? Education & Treatment of Children, 33, 206–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunter, P. L., Miller, K. A., & Venn, M. L. (2003). A case study of the effects of self-graphing reading performance data for a girl identified with emotional/behavioral disorders. Preventing School Failure, 48(1), 28–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagans, K. S., & Good, R. H. (2013). Decreasing reading differences in children from disadvantages backgrounds: The effects of an early literacy intervention. Contemporary School Psychology, 17(1), 103–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. R., Friedlander, B. D., Saddler, B., Frizzelle, R., & Graham, S. (2005). Self-monitoring of attention versus self-monitoring of academic performance: Effects among students with ADHD in the general education classroom. Journal of Special Education, 39(3), 145–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap by age 3. American Educator, 27(1), 4–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Council for Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 students from first though fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437–447. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaminski, R. A., & Good, R. H. (2015). DIBELS next essential workshop. Eugene, OR: Dynamic Measurement Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koenig, E. A. (2013). Closing the feedback-standard gap with the use of a performance feedback and goal setting intervention to improve elementary students’ writing fluency (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3568790).

  • Kupzyk, S., Daly, E. J., III, Ihlo, T., & Young, N. D. (2012). Modifying instruction within tiers in multitiered intervention programs. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 219–230. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magnan, J. (2006). The efficacy of training kindergarteners in assisted self-graphing as a supplemental intervention within a response-to intervention model (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3231133).

  • Mathes, P. G., Clancy-Menchetti, J., & Torgesen, J. K. (2001). Kindergarten peer-assisted literacy strategies (K-PALS): Sopris West.

  • McMaster, K. L., Kung, S.-H., Han, I., & Cao, M. (2008). Peer-assisted learning strategies: A “Tier 1” approach to promoting English learners’ response to intervention. Exceptional Children, 74(2), 194–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. W., Anderson, A., Glassenbury, M., Lang, R., & Didden, R. (2013). Increasing on-task behavior in students in a regular classroom: Effectiveness of a self-management procedure using a tactile prompt. Journal of Behavioral Education, 22, 302–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-013-9180-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. W., Prebble, S., Robertson, J., Waetford, R., & Anderson, A. (2001). Self-recording with goal setting: A self-management programme for the classroom. Educational Psychology, 21(3), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410120065469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moxley, R. A. (1998). Treatment-only designs and student self-recording strategies for public school teachers. Education and Treatment of Children, 21, 37–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2018). The nation’s report card. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center on Intensive Intervention. (2013). Data-based individualization: A framework for intensive intervention. Washington, DC: Office of Special Education, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel (NRP). (2000). Report of the national reading panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. (National Institutes of Health Pub. No. 00-4769). United States: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

  • Nelson, R. J., Benner, G. J., & Gonzalez, J. (2003). Learner characteristics that influence the treatment effectiveness of early literacy interventions: A meta-analytic review. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 255–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafdal, B. H., McMaster, K. L., McConnell, S. R., Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2011). The effectiveness of kindergarten peer-assisted learning strategies for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77(3), 299–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risley, T. (2005). Montrose M. Wolf (1935–2004). Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 279–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rock, M. L., & Thead, B. K. (2007). The effects of fading a strategic self-monitoring intervention on students’ academic engagement, accuracy, and productivity. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16, 389–412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-007-9049-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shimabakuro, S. M., Prater, M. A., Jenkins, A., & Edelen-Smith, P. (1999). The effects of self-monitoring on academic performance on students with learning disabilities and ADD/ADHD. Education and Treatment of Children, 22(4), 397–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stotz, K. E., Itoi, M., Konrad, M., & Alber-Morgan, S. R. (2008). Effects of self-graphing on written expression of fourth grade students with high-incidence disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 17, 172–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-007-9055-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland, K. S., & Snyder, A. (2007). Effects of reciprocal peer tutoring and self-graphing on reading fluency and classroom behavior of middle school students with emotional or behavioral disorders. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 15(2), 103–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volpe, R. J., Young, G. I., Piana, M. G., & Zaslofsky, A. F. (2012). Integrating classwide early literacy intervention and behavioral supports: A pilot investigation. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14(1), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300711402591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, S. F., Fey, M. E., & Yoder, P. J. (2007). Differential treatment intensity research: A missing link to creating optimally effective communication interventions. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 13, 70–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolery, M., & Gast, D. L. (1984). Effective and efficient procedures for the transfer of stimulus control. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 4, 52–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School Psychology Program, College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services, University of Cincinnati, P.O. Box 210068, Cincinnati, OH, 45221-0068, USA

    Chelsea Ritter & Julie Q. Morrison

  2. Department of Student Services, Cincinnati Public Schools, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Keara Sherman

Authors
  1. Chelsea Ritter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julie Q. Morrison
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Keara Sherman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julie Q. Morrison.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Chelsea Ritter received funding to conduct this study from the University of Cincinnati's Graduate Student Governance Association (GSGA) Research Fellowship for the Advancement of Diversity or Interdisciplinary Research. Julie Q. Morrison and Keara Sherman declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Review Board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ritter, C., Morrison, J.Q. & Sherman, K. Differential Effects of Self-graphing on Self-monitoring of Early Literacy Outcomes in Kindergarten Students. J Behav Educ 30, 559–577 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-020-09390-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-020-09390-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation